Won't communist utopia get like REALLY boring after a while?

there would still be books, cinema, women, sports, food, travelling, politics and sho on and sho on

i didn't say i agree with that statement, but that is a possibility under communism.

If enough people say no, it doesn't matter what the fuck you want.

then i'll extract the resources myself and everyone else can suck my dick.

and before some rightist chucklefuck says "so you'd be a capitalist entrepreneur :^🍀🍀🍀", no, i'd be a worker making use of the means of production as i please to meet my own personal aims. if i was a capitalist i would be seeking to deprive others of those means of production.

Rated PG Parental Guidance: suicide

Kys friend

so youre going to mine all the metals required for an airplane.

and then make your own tools (since the collective has decided to not let you use valuable work shop time

and then somehow build a combustion engine.

and airframe

and electronics.

ok

and this is the point where you reveal you have no idea what you're talking about.

(also, the Wright brothers did it with what, 3 people and 5 years? and they were doing it with little to go on, particularly vis-a-vis the engine. doing it with 100 years of hindsight would be relatively trivial.)

ok, explain to me how your brand of leftism would deal with such matters?

if the means of production belongs to the workers, the workers have the right to tell you to fuck off with your airplane

.

ok have fun in your wooden airplane.

If there are enough people sharing a common interest, there's nothing stopping them from organizing a coop to pursue it. If there's enough people interested in building aircraft to do so, there's nothing stopping them from coming together to do so.

there's nothing stopping them except another larger group of people who believe its a waste of resources and deny them access to resources and the means of production

then that group of people can extract their own resources themselves, and make their own commune where they're in control of the means of production that they want to use for building said aircraft.

and that's why large scale anarcho-communism cant work.

especially on a global scale. how long until communes start warring?

i am a worker. the means of production belong to me. since we're explicitly talking about communist utopia (where basically any assumptions would fly, but only some very basic ones are required.)
ridiculously easy, even with some other rule like having to bring my own resources or replace tools that i wear out.

i will
mywoodenairplane.com/

Fucking dropped. Almost no socialist post Marx have cultivated any sort of political movement based on the praxis employed by utopian socialists.

Capitalism isn't a fucking video game. People don't enjoy having to worry about how I'm going to be able to accommodate what are quite rudimentary needs from paycheck to paycheck. Nobody likes the fact that their livelihoods are reliant entirely on how well you can grovel to the guy who already has his finger in the pie when it comes to owning the means of production. Nobody likes having most of the value they create through their labor stripped from them to the enrichment of the ruling class with little to no returns to the worker in question.
As for me personally, participation in capitalism is hardly an end on its own; the accumulation of capital for its own sake brings no existential satisfaction (beyond those who are eating from the trash can all the time) and burdens the individual with the expectation that they continually sacrifice any and all convictions that stand in the way of upholding the status that comes with that capital. It's a system that is shackling both for the capitalist and the workers that he exploits to remain a capitalist.

I suggest you read this. Wilde was a bit of an idealist, but he gets across a lot of the ideas of how socialism ultimately unshackles creative possibilities that are left suppressed or without outlets under capitalism.

Neither housing nor food are particularly scarce. In the US, the number of unoccupied homes VASTLY outnumbers the number of homeless, and we still produce far more food than we consume. This trend is similar when one looks at the global (not regional) scale: we currently have the means to accommodate at least the basic needs of virtually all people without any sort of desperate struggle. The problem is a matter of distribution, of which capitalism with its focus on exchange over use as the driving force of production has little concern regarding inadequacies in distribution methods so long as there are relatively immediate return on investment.

If property is defined by use/occupation under Mutualism, people can use whatever they use and occupy alongside others to establish their own voluntary cooperatives for whatever purpose they wish. Read Proudhon.

the means of production don't belong to an individual, they belong to workers collective. if that collective decides you can use it for a certain purpose, then you're fucked.

yeah, people can just use and occupy whatever they wish, just like public restrooms. public restrooms are nice.

that would at best be some kind of socialism/mutualism, not "communist utopia"

read steve keen

utopia isn't real

Post-scarcity and full automation may be real at some point.

no it wont. post-scarcity is a meme. and you cant have full automation without post scarcity.

Saying that something "is a meme" isn't an argument.

the math doesn't add up m8. you'll either run out of resources, or pollute the earth to hell. remember, capitalist production relies on the exploitation of the 3rd world and keeping their living standards 30 years behind. this is why production output is so high.

the question in the OP was about what life under a hypothetical utopia would be like.

that's why i said "no, there'd still be things to do." instead of "no, because utopia don't real, read steve keen, behead a neoclassical economist and push for de-selection of your local Blairite for the glory of the SOCDEM GANG"

p.s. read steve keen.

bro, everyone is a worker

...

Why not?

Which you're still doing, you retard. This is a zero-sum game, you taking all that crap from the commune to fund your own megalomaniacal projects means they cannot be used for useful shit. Meanwhile, you'd be contributing nothing of value to the pile because you'd be spending all your time doing your own random BS.

resources aren't "means of production"

especially not fucking wood which can be regrown with ease.

Yeah, after a while people would just endlessly stare at the walls doing nothing.

Yes it can get boring. Which is why globlaism and internationalism are shit.
Because if everywhere in the globe there's only comunism, then i would have nowhere to go and try different things.

Nations are not spooks. Borders are not spooks. Culture and Costums are not spooks.

There will still be problems under Communism. They just wont be problems like people starving to death, or war, or crime. They'll be like the fact you're doomed to live a life of loneliness regardless of what mode of production you're under.

DELET THIS

you're doing it wrong

Which is why population control is a necessity to keep the world from turning into a nightmare realm.

...

akshually you would be appropriating the means of production for technically less efficient task than the one it would have been prescribed for by the planning committees and AI intelligence used to allot all the resources used in every community. You'd be asked to put everything back or be imprisoned, fined, ostracized etc. Lol

No, North Korea is super fun, so is Venezuela. All sorts of happenings in socialist/communist countries. Riots, starvation, eating zoo animals, the list goes on!

good luck, my plane will carry pipe bombs

A thread died for this.